Texas Senate Bill SB191

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 11/9/10
• Out of Senate Committee: 3/7/11
• Voted on by Senate: 3/17/11
• Refer: 1/31/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/11/11
• Report Pass: 3/7/11
• Voted on by House: 5/19/11
• Engrossed: 3/17/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 3/30/11
• Report Pass: 5/5/11
• Enrolled: 5/20/11
• Vetoed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to disposition of a contested case by the Texas Medical Board.

Impact

The bill's primary impact is on the operational procedures of the Texas Medical Board when it comes to contested cases. By ensuring that the board cannot change findings or conclusions made by an administrative law judge, SB191 aims to increase the integrity of the legal process involved in these cases. It promotes a more transparent and predictable outcome in contested cases, allowing stakeholders to have clearer expectations regarding legal proceedings.

Summary

Senate Bill 191 focuses on the procedures for the formal disposition of contested cases by the Texas Medical Board. The bill aims to amend Section 164.007 of the Occupations Code, outlining how contested cases should be handled, particularly emphasizing the role of the administrative law judge. One of the significant changes proposed is that the Texas Medical Board will not be allowed to alter findings of fact or conclusions of law made by the administrative law judge, nor can they vacate or modify those orders without following specific legal provisions. This establishes clear boundaries between the administrative process and the board's authority.

Contention

Critics of SB191 may argue that while the bill intends to add structure to the administrative process, it also limits the Medical Board's capacity to intervene in cases where they might believe an alternative sanction or finding is warranted. This raises concerns about potential inflexibility in addressing unique circumstances that arise in medical practice cases. Supporters, however, may argue that this restriction is essential for maintaining a consistent legal approach and preventing capricious decisions by the board that could undermine the rulings of trained legal professionals.